Confirmed: Mitch Clark to Melbourne

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Neeld's "animation" consists of one eyebrow being raised frequently. A child wouldn't be convinced that he isn't a faulty robotic mannequin.

But yes, a more exciting human than Lyon, granted.

Dosh is most surely the only factor here, though.
 
Freo cocked it up....i actually thought they were going to be on the GOOD end of the trade table for the first time, but no, they ****ed up!

Clark would have been perfect at the dockers - and at 23 he is primed and ready to go.

Like has been said before I see this as pretty much a win win for all parties.

Melbourne get their man.
Brisbane get the compo they wanted.
Clark gets the cash.

As for Freo, looks like they had a limit for what they were willing to pay, and once the deal went over it they didn't chase it.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Neeld's "animation" consists of one eyebrow being raised frequently. A child wouldn't be convinced that he isn't a faulty robotic mannequin.

But yes, a more exciting human than Lyon, granted.

Dosh is most surely the only factor here, though.

Really that's fairly unusual ..is it a mono brow or just one bionic eyebrow?
 
Amazing backflip to say that least. He must of been scared off by Chris Bond the smiling assasin who still has Harvey's blood on his hands.
 
Melbourne were throwing $ like a drunken sailor. On TWR, they mentioned that they had offered Dawes $650 K / year.

It's nothing to do with players seeing Melbourne in any new light. When you have a young group, who are highly touted, it sets a dangerous precedent when one of them (or more) asks for a pay increase next contract.
 
Start listing the best players in the league.

Stop when you get to Clark. Then tell me he's worth what he's being paid. That is: more than anyone on Geelong's list.

If Geelong payed all their players what they are worth the club would be over the cap x20.
 
Paying overs for a guy who won't even end up as good as David Hale.
Dees should have just hung onto that number 12 pick. Time will tell i guess
 
Good trade for Melbourne but it won't make them heaps better yet. They still have holes to fill.

You are quite correct.
And the Melbourne Football Club would acknowledge just that point!
But I'm glad we got him!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I agree with most of your post.

In your opinion, what players do Melbourne have now that are better than Clark? Which young players currently on Melbourne's list do you think will be better than Clark in the next year or 2?

If Melbourne don't start looking like they'll be successful, starting with next season, do you think that those players (if you name any) will be happy that Clark is getting paid so much?

The club has to be successful for it to not matter.

That goes without saying. If we're not successful within the next few years, then questions will be asked about many facets of the club, not just the Mitch Clark recruitment.
 
LOL freo admin whinging that "we're disappointed that Mitch didn't follow through on his commitment to sign" in the same year they ditched Harvey mid-contract.

Two way street, loyalty. Funny how karma works out that way.
 
Melb have got their man. They saw and opportunity and they swooped.

Now, over time it may turn out to be a poor acquisition as his salary will be heavily scrutinized based on his output for his new club but at this point in time, the Dees paid what they were willing to in order to get their man.

Freo botched this big time. They procrastinated and let it play out far too long. Ross Lyon botched the Ball transfer by wanting more than he was worth in trade terms and now he and his club have botched the Clark transfer by trying to play hard ball, despite having the currency to seal the deal.

At the end of the day, you either want the player you are chasing or you don't. You either get serious or you don't even bother. Freo have pretty much wasted an entire week, trying to be active and have nothing to show for all their work,
 
imo, all freo need is a bit of good fortune, not mitch clark (or ross lyon ;))

i think melb have done alright from this deal though. the gloating from some of the melb supporters itt is painful. imagine this place when/if the club actually achieves something... :)
 
Paying overs for a guy who won't even end up as good as David Hale.
Dees should have just hung onto that number 12 pick. Time will tell i guess

At first I was like, what are you talking about? But now I think about it I agree
His presence is bigger, but his output is about the same
 
LOL freo admin whinging that "we're disappointed that Mitch didn't follow through on his commitment to sign" in the same year they ditched Harvey mid-contract.

Two way street, loyalty. Funny how karma works out that way.

lol at Melbourne supporters spruiking their landing of a "big fish" with a big contract - when they sooked incessantly about losing Scully to a big contract

looks like melbourne replaced one mercenary with another.....
 
I reckon it's not a bad piece of business. Yeah they are paying him a lot of money, but they will potentially getting rid of some dead wood on big money soon so can afford it. He is a good player and could become a very good to great player with a run of no injuries. His first few years were basly hampered by injury. With him, watts and Jurrah up forward, it's pretty potent
 
I would have thought that an issue with paying supposed "overs" (some would say this isn't a case of paying overs, but I disagree) for any player when you're not in the running for a flag is the pressure it places on your cap when you become successful, or at least approach success.

Therefore this throwing around of money makes me wonder what Neeld really thinks of his squad's chances of winning a premiership in the next few years.

I may be wrong, we'll see.

But I think that the Pies and Cats are good examples of how success can be obtained and maintained without throwing money at big names. We used to be all about that at Collingwood, as everyone knows. However our building a successful squad came from recruiting quality youth and finding some good rookies, then bringing them through together as a unit. Then when it comes time to talk contracts the players are a tight knit group that wants to stay together and will forego big pay packets elsewhere to do that. Then the experience that is brought in is attracted by the chance of success and to be a part of something. People may point to Ball being lured by money but the contract was heavily loaded. As far as I'm aware that isn't the case with Clarke?

Like I said, I may be wrong, but when I think sustainable success for a developing team I don't immediately think "pay overs".

Good luck to Mitch, he obviously wanted out. Speaking of which, why was he so desperate to leave? We all thought homesickness but that was clearly exaggerated. Other factors caused him to want out?
 
Its pretty well known that a lot of Cats players are on nice deals outside of football that supplement their income. I'd wager the same goes for Collingwood.

Money talks and bullshit walks. Geelong and Collingwood have a lot of money, Melbourne aren't the paupers they once were either.

And Clark's deal is indeed heavily loaded. Most will be paid next year - unlikely to affect our salary cap flexibility, which is why its such a nice move.
 
LOL freo admin whinging that "we're disappointed that Mitch didn't follow through on his commitment to sign" in the same year they ditched Harvey mid-contract.

Two way street, loyalty. Funny how karma works out that way.

Funny, I could have sworn Bailey was still contracted when Melbourne knifed him. When's karma going to catch up there?

Oh yeah, you're paying Clark more than anyone else in your club! :thumbsu:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top